Adrift in a sea of advanced stats

[Mike Sixel]

 

Interesting that it’s never presented that way. Writers use the higher WAR number and ignore the other one if they want to pump up a player. Vice versa if a writer wants to throw caution on a player.

 

You must be reading different sites than me. I never see that. Outside TD.....

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

Actually, they purport to measure the same thing. 

Well, to the extent they measure the same thing, they do so in different ways. Just like batting average and on-base percentage both measure a player's offensive performance, but in different ways.

[terrydactyls]

I have no idea what this post means? Not one person here has said they only enjoy skills if they can be measured. Really. Not one person.

Are you asking if you don't know what the post means? Or did you mean to say that you didn't know what the post means?

[Mike Sixel]

 

Are you asking if you don't know what the post means? Or did you mean to say that you didn't know what the post means?

 

Like, I don't understand the post. No one has said they can't enjoy baseball w/o stats. No one. 

[USAFChief]

 

Well, to the extent they measure the same thing, they do so in different ways. Just like batting average and on-base percentage both measure a player's offensive performance, but in different ways.

well, no, they both purport to identify the same performance, and assign the same value: "wins above replacement." 

 

batting average and on-base percentage are different things...and both are measured and reported the same no matter if you go to Fangraphs or Baseball Ref. You don't get a BA of .275 on Fangraphs and .375 on BR.

[Otto von Ballpark]

 

well, no, they both purport to identify the same performance, and assign the same value: "wins above replacement." 

 

batting average and on-base percentage are different things...and both are measured and reported the same no matter if you go to Fangraphs or Baseball Ref. You don't get a BA of .275 on Fangraphs and .375 on BR.

There are different ways to measure performance, and I wouldn't expect them all to be equal.

 

So you just object to them having the same name? I use fWAR or bWAR to denote them, at least when there's a notable difference.

[Mike Sixel]

 

well, no, they both purport to identify the same performance, and assign the same value: "wins above replacement." 

 

batting average and on-base percentage are different things...and both are measured and reported the same no matter if you go to Fangraphs or Baseball Ref. You don't get a BA of .275 on Fangraphs and .375 on BR.

 

It's not unique to this to have different ways to measure the same thing.....For example, what is the fastest pinewood derby car? The one that races one time at half the time as all the others, and breaks? Or the one that wins the finals? 

 

Is the BEST baseball team really the WS winner, or is it more likely the regular season best record is the best team (there are league that award those two things differently)?

 

I could probably spend hours typing up examples of "measuring the same thing" that use different processes for that measurement.

 

Here's an easy one, does water boil at 212 degrees, or 100?

[Squirrel]

 

Here's an easy one, does water boil at 212 degrees, or 100?

Yes

[twinsfanstreif]

I don't really understand how most of these things are calculated but I noticed the huge difference in fWAR and bWAR when looking up Maeda vs Gibson. Both were lower in bWAR than fWAR but the weird part is there is a 1WAR difference in bWAR between them in advantage of Maeda. On fWAR Gibson gets a .1 advantage despite having worse metrics across the board except a very slight advantage in xFIP. Does it really hold that much weight? It's almost like none of the other metrics mattered. Also fWAR was very favorable to Martin Perez last year which is weird

[Richie the Rally Goat]

I don't really understand how most of these things are calculated but I noticed the huge difference in fWAR and bWAR when looking up Maeda vs Gibson. Both were lower in bWAR than fWAR but the weird part is there is a 1WAR difference in bWAR between them in advantage of Maeda. On fWAR Gibson gets a .1 advantage despite having worse metrics across the board except a very slight advantage in xFIP. Does it really hold that much weight? It's almost like none of the other metrics mattered. Also fWAR was very favorable to Martin Perez last year which is weird

https://www.baseball-reference.com/about/war_explained_pitch.shtml

 

Baseball reference down a ways has a good explainer detailing the differences between bWAR and fWAR.

 

The heading is “ How this Compares to FanGraphs Pitcher WAR” and it’s roughly the 14th bolded heading.

 

I like FIP in my WAR as it holds home runs steady across league average, but comparing the two can give you some quick and dirty flavor as to how the pitcher earned their WAR.